# [SERVER] chparent()

Ron Stanions (chaeon@roc.clawpaw.com)
Wed, 20 Mar 1996 09:51:07 PST

- Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

    This would definitely be a Bad Thing(tm).  For onw, chparenting an object
    has nothing to do with initializing it.  If you recycle an object, for instance, all
    the children of that object are chparented to the parent of the recycled
    object.  If they were initialized every time that happened, half of the variables
    would be erased.  The initialize() verb is particularly useful for presetting
    properties to fixed values when an object is created.  If you create an object
    whos initialize verb call resets name to "You see a thing that has no description",
    then if you recycle a parent object somewhere in the heirarchy, all the children
    of that type will suddenly lose their descriptions.  not a good thing.

    If you chparent an object to another object in the same parent chain, then all
    the properties that exist on both remain intact as they were.  if you chparent an
    object off of that parent chain, then all the properties become cleared, but in
    neither of these cases should the initialize verb be called, because it can do
    totally arbitrary things which could have severe side-effects.

    ----------
    From:  Ranalou[SMTP:ranalou@stoopid.res.wpi.edu]
    Sent:  Wednesday, March 20, 1996 12:14 PM
    To:  moo-cows@parc.xerox.com
    Subject:  [SERVER] chparent()

    I know that it is so with create(), but when a chparent() is done, does
    the :initialize() verb on the changed object get called?  If not, why?
    And, if there is no reason why this would be a bad thing, I'd like to add
    it to the wish-list for future servers...

    --
    + That Silly Ranalou Guy, ranalou@stoopid.res.wpi.edu
    + Ranalou on CowsGoMOO, stoopid.res.wpi.edu 1234  <--- Official Blatant Plug!
    +
    + Do not taunt the Happy Fun Ball.